dc.contributor.author | Flanagan, Paul | |
dc.contributor.author | Tumilty, Emma | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2016-01-12T21:00:16Z | |
dc.date.available | 2016-01-12T21:00:16Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2015-11-27 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 2423-009X | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/10652/3164 | |
dc.description.abstract | Until recently, community organisations in Aotearoa New Zealand (NZ) have not had any avenue for ethical review of research involving human participants unless they were connected to researchers involved with health and disability research (narrowly-‐defined), or tertiary education institutions. The New Zealand Ethics Committee (NZEC), a recent community research development initiative, has invited organisations to submit their proposals for voluntary ethics review and provides research methodology support where sought. This paper introduces this initiative, describing both its make-‐up and processes. It also explores the relationship between reviewer-‐applicant in the NZEC as distinctive to the relationship of reviewer-‐applicant in traditional ethical review settings, explaining this difference of power relations and philosophy. Those in the community see research ethics review as something to be learned along with research methodology/practice. | en_NZ |
dc.language.iso | en | en_NZ |
dc.publisher | Unitec ePress | en_NZ |
dc.rights | Whanake: The Pacific Journal of Community Development is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-‐NonCommercial 4.0 International License. | en_NZ |
dc.rights | Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 New Zealand | * |
dc.rights.uri | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/nz/ | * |
dc.subject | New Zealand Ethics Committee (NZEC) | en_NZ |
dc.subject | research ethics | en_NZ |
dc.subject | research with human participants | en_NZ |
dc.subject | community development research | en_NZ |
dc.subject | New Zealand. Committee of Inquiry into Allegations concerning the Treatment of Cervical Cancer at National Women's Hospital and into other related matters. | en_NZ |
dc.subject | Cartwright Inquiry 1987-1988 (N.Z.) | en_NZ |
dc.title | How does voluntary ethics improve research? : introducing a community research development initiative | en_NZ |
dc.type | Journal Article | en_NZ |
dc.rights.holder | Unitec ePress | en_NZ |
dc.subject.marsden | 220107 Professional Ethics (incl. police and research ethics) | en_NZ |
dc.subject.marsden | 111708 Health and Community Services | en_NZ |
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitation | Flanagan, P. and Tumilty, E. (2015) How does voluntary ethics improve research? Introducing a community research development initiative, Whanake: The Pacific Journal of Community Development, 1(2), 14-23. Unitec Institute of Technology. Unitec ePress. Retrieved from: http://www.unitec.ac.nz/epress | en_NZ |
unitec.institution | University of Waikato | en_NZ |
unitec.institution | Otago Polytechnic | en_NZ |
unitec.publication.spage | 14 | en_NZ |
unitec.publication.lpage | 23 | en_NZ |
unitec.publication.volume | 1(2) | en_NZ |
unitec.publication.title | Whanake: The Pacific Journal of Community Development | en_NZ |
unitec.peerreviewed | yes | en_NZ |
dc.contributor.affiliation | Otago Polytechnic | en_NZ |
dc.contributor.affiliation | University of Waikato | en_NZ |
unitec.relation.epress | http://www.unitec.ac.nz/epress/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/How-does-Voluntary-Ethics-Improve-Research-by-Paul-Flanagan-and-Emma-Tumilty.pdf | en_NZ |
unitec.institution.studyarea | Community Development | |